Session 3C - Co-governance for the co-creation of nature-based solutions

Green Infrastructure (GI) are strategically planned networks of natural and semi-natural areas such as green roofs, hedgerows, forests and orchard meadows. GI provide essential ecosystem services (ESS) such as water and air, and they are directly and indirectly relevant for people and business. However, GI and ESS are under threat by economic activities that exploited or did not respect the natural environment and public policies that did not protect them. 

We know from the “wedding cake” model proposed by the Stockholm Resilience Center that the Economy serves the Society and that the Society cannot thrive if the biosphere is not healthy (European Union, 2020). However, the current economic paradigm tends to affect negatively GI and ESS because is based on nature exploitation (Kronenberg et al., 2021). Nature conservation is often perceived to be an obstacle to the economic development. In order to measure the value of ecosystem services (Stange et al., 2022) and to start a virtuous cycle including a broad range of technological and social innovations (Kuhlmann and Rip, 2018), the Triple Helix (TH) framework was proposed.  Composed of three spheres: Academia, Business and Government, it allows to explain how innovative ecosystems were developed and provide policymakers engaged in regional growth with relevant guidelines (Etzkowitz and Gulbrandsen, 1999). However, according to some authors, society still lacks in this framework (Kuhlmann and Rip, 2018).  

Consequently, several authors proposed a quadruple helix (QH) theory, with the fourth helix associated with civil society (Roman et al., 2020).The Fourth Helix refers to private and public organizations, professional or amateur users, and ordinary citizens (Del Vecchio et al., 2017). This ‘fourth helix’ is made of a fragmented and heterogeneous group of stakeholders that cannot be engaged in participatory processes through uniform interactions (Roman et al., 2020). A variety of processes at various levels have to be envisaged (Trivellato et al., 2017), and we assume that the environment and more specifically GI and ESS will bear the consequences (positive and negative) of the actions carried out by the QH players.

Hence, the focus of this paper is on what should be the ideal governance for Green Infrastructure when seen with the theoretical lenses of the Quadruple Helix. We based our study on a systematic review of policy recommendations of a number of official reports issued by public organizations and project deliverables since 2010, from the following EU funded programs: Interreg, Horizon etc (see list in the Annex), written by experts. Our analysis shows that most of recommandations are addressed to government and society: thus suggesting that social innovation, i.e learning to solve issues through participation (Edwards-Schachter and Wallace, 2017, p. 73), is a key lever for the development and effective management of GI and ESS, and revealing that way beyond government, a wide range of actors such as citizens are needed to tackle Grand Societal Challenges at local, national or transnational levels.   

Bibliography available

Governance learning is an emerging field in the policy literature (Dunlop & Radelli, 2013; Howlett, 2014). Although new empirical and theoretical insights are growing in governance learning, less focus is given to what extent these knowledge are informed by practice for climate adaptation (Gerlak et al., 2020). Some strong institutional settings have the authority to push forward top-down climate change integration through hard regulations (Schoenefeld & Jordan, 2020). For instance, nature-based solutions as a climate adaptation concept have developed alongside the research and innovation agenda within the European Commission and the European Environment Agency. Instead, other institutions or governance settings may depend on soft governance capacities with limited substantive authority but high interests in integrating climate change concerns throughout other agencies or departments, resulting in ineffective policy accumulation (Biesbroek, 2021). Yet, no attention has been given to how collective actions, or “practice from the bottom-up,” inform governance structure to learn what kinds of effective policies and actions are needed to be implemented to address complex and place-dependent climate adaptations in urban settings. Thus, this paper suggests that collective actions through citizen and activist engagements are essential sources for formal governance structures to learn how to implement robust climate actions in urban contexts.

Drawing on the insights of two cities experiencing climate impacts differently, Bergen (Norway) and Istanbul (Turkey), this study assesses how collective actions influence local governments to learn from these actions to implement just climate actions in their localities. Two empirical cases illustrate that learning from collective actions takes different forms and directions by the formal governance structures. Using environmental justice (specifically recognition and procedural) and policy learning literature, this study identifies a three-part governance learning typology that emerged through collective actions that may trigger governance structures for policy integration or change:1) Learning by resisting (formal governance structures neither recognize nor include vulnerable groups`  demands in the decision-making outcomes, but come up with alternative plans influenced by collective actions), 2) Learning by co-opting (formal governance structures recognize vulnerable communities` needs but do not include their demands in decision-making outcomes), 3) Learning by expanding (formal governance structures both recognize and include vulnerable communities´ demands in decision-making processes and outcomes). 

There is still progress for nature-based solutions to become mainstream in planning and governing practices. From exclusively being a concept of climate change adaptation and biodiversity conservation, nature-based solutions have evolved to become a resource for environmental management. Enhancing governance learning for just climate adaptation in cities (e.g., nature-based solutions) requires collectively generated knowledge. The two case studies in this study show that governance learning takes different directions and forms depending on the institutional contexts, the willingness of decision-makers, and socio-political environments. The governance learning typologies coupled with climate justice concerns in this paper could be beneficial for other case studies, especially to determine how climate adaptation actions foster or hinder climate injustices while urban practitioners introduce methods to develop nature-based solutions in cities.

References:

Biesbroek, R. (2021). Policy integration and climate change adaptation. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 52, 75-81.

Dunlop, C. A., & Radaelli, C. M. (2013). Systematising policy learning: From monolith to dimensions. Political studies, 61(3), 599-619.

Gerlak, A. K., et al. (2020). Learning in environmental governance: opportunities for translating theory to practice. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 22(5), 653-666.

Howlett, M. (2014). From the ‘old’to the ‘new’policy design: design thinking beyond markets and collaborative governance. Policy sciences, 47(3), 187-207.

Schoenefeld, J. et al. (2020). Towards harder soft governance? Monitoring climate policy in the EU. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 22(6), 774-786.

Introduction

In the context of climate change, urban agglomerations must establish strategies that increase the resilience of local communities. There is a growing interest in urban planning in integrating Green Infrastructure on different scales as part of the solutions in this perspective. However, several barriers are identified, such as the need for new models of governance (Marques et al., 2022).

Innovative planning policies have relied on adaptive governance models to address this gap, which refers to flexible, collaborative, and multi-level decision-making processes aiming to manage territories in an adaptable approach (Schultz et al., 2015). In Barcelona Metropolitan Area (AMB), the case of PEPNat illustrates an adaptative governance model for green infrastructure on the metropolitan scale. Covering the territory of the Collserola Natural Park and transitional zones in the surrounding area, the plan is a hybrid instrument that combines environmental and urban aspects considering the dynamism of metropolitan open spaces (Vidal-Casanovas et al., 2020).

Methodology

The analysis was based on four dimensions: (1)Governance, (2)Environmental preservation, (3)Built heritage, and (4)Economic activities. The methodology involves the analysis of three main data sources: (1)Planning documents, (2)Papers and reports, and (3)Interview with technician.

Results and discussion

• Adaptative governance, participation, and the use of technology for monitoring

The plan’s construction was participatory. Public consultations in several formats (e.g. online, in person, and at information points in the park) were performed, involving different actors and planning scales. Aiming to protect ecological functions in an area in constant transformation, the instrument proposes to commit to flexibility and adaptability, relying on the cooperation of multiple actors. This proposal is accompanied by monitoring based on Geographic Information Systems (GIS), which allows constant assessment of the Park.

• Environmental preservation and sustainable uses

The park has different zones that vary with regard to public access according to conservation needs. Among the most accessible zones are areas for public use, and leisure inside and outside the park, to improve the urban-environmental conditions of transition areas and guarantee better accessibility. By associating sustainable uses with economic activities, forestry, agriculture, and livestock are allowed.

• Activation of the built heritage with creative and sustainable activities

New constructions are prohibited. The strategy is to maintain and improve the existing built heritage and public facilities. The idea is to attract new uses for existing buildings, and promote public and private collaborations to foster green economy, local consumption, and environmental education.

Conclusions

The innovation of the PEPNat relies on the search for combining environmental protection, activation of new dynamics, and sustainable economic activities within an adaptative governance model. The plan presents a flexible strategy to improve ecological and urban connections between the city and the park by creating transition zones with leisure spaces and incorporating existing buildings. However, its implementation is still limited, especially regarding the suggested transition zones outside the park's boundaries, which depend on the surrounding municipalities' enforcement.

References

Marques, A. L., Alvim, A. T. B. & Schröder, J. (2022). Ecosystem Services and Urban Planning: A Review of the Contribution of the Concept to Adaptation in Urban Areas. Sustainability, 14(4), 2391. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042391

Schultz, L., Folke, C., Österblom, H. & Olsson, P. (2015). Adaptive governance, ecosystem management, and natural capital. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(24), 7369–7374. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1406493112

Vidal-Casanovas, E., Cid, L., Farrero, A., García-Rodríguez, P., Herrero, L., Ilousi, K., Monclús, O. & Vila, J. (2020). Planificación para una gestión dinámica y adaptativa de la infraestructura verde metropolitana: el PEPNat como caso de estudio. IV Congreso ISUF-H: Metrópolis En Recomposición: Prospectivas Proyectuales En El Siglo XXI: Forma Urbis y Territorios Metropolitanos, Barcelona, 28-30 Septiembre 2020, 1–17.

The paper discusses challenges identified in the design and initiation of the Nature-based climate adaptation programme for the urban areas of Penang Island, the first urban climate adaptation programme to have been developed for Malaysia. Initiated in 2019, the programme’s development involved extensive stakeholder and community engagements and complex governance challenges. Designed by the researcher, the programme won the Climathon Global Cities Award in 2020 and was endorsed to receive US$ 10 million in funding for execution from the Adaptation Fund in October 2021.

The main challenges identified were the lack of awareness by government officials regarding the country’s vulnerability to climate change and on the potential of nature-based solutions to address climate-related challenges.  Stakeholder engagement posed some challenges as well but also presented unique opportunities for learning. The lack of awareness regarding the country’s exposure to climate impacts was shown at multiple levels, including by some of the country’s highest officials - in April 2021, the minister of Environment and Water of Malaysia publicly stated the country was not vulnerable to climate change. As the country was not viewed as vulnerable, there was no understanding of the importance of introducing adaptation projects. The team also faced challenges related with how the status of the country in the international arena was perceived internally. The application for international funding for programme execution was disincentivised by federal authorities due to their reticence in accepting the status of Malaysia as a developing nation, due to its upper middle-income country status. Governance challenges were the most serious threat to the project and almost lead to its abandonment, mostly due to conflicting interests between federal and state level authorities, which, on occasion, were politically motivated. 

The lack of understanding of the potential of nature-based solutions (NBS) to address climate change also posed a challenge. Extensive stakeholder engagements and presentations of the programme in national events were able to overcome this challenge by presenting evidence on the subject, not only in terms of adaptation, but also in terms of mitigation, biodiversity, as well as by listing the multiple co-benefits of urban green spaces. Multiple stakeholder engagements also revealed insightful differences between focus groups and workshops with experts and the engagements with vulnerable communities. Vulnerable communities prioritised heat as the main climate-related concern, while experts prioritised floods and stated heat was not a concern. This was attributed to the fact that experts, as part of the middle class, inhabit continuously air-conditioned spaces. These engagements made clear that, to understand impacts already taking place, it is crucial to engage with the most vulnerable communities or some effects may go unnoticed. 

In a fast-changing scenario, the floods of December 2021 were attributed to climate change and national awareness rose almost overnight. The researcher was part of discussions for the initiation of the development of the National Adaptation Plan of Malaysia by the Ministry of Environment and Water and brings a unique insight into the climate change debate in Malaysia.

A participatory municipal public management is essential to build a sustainable and efficient city; and only with the inclusion of an active Civil Society with a place to act is it possible for the public administration to understand the municipal realities and solve the challenges presented on a daily basis. In order to achieve such objective, the São Paulo City Hall, in accordance with the membership requirements of the Open Government Partnership, periodically prepares the "Open Government Action Plans", commitments to open government that stimulate a more transparent, integral, responsive and participative management. Through such Plans, Public Power and Civil Society are able to come together in a structured environment conducive to dialogue. In this environment, both spheres are enabled to co-create, co-implement and co-evaluate a series of jointly established commitments that ultimately aim to ensure greater openness of government, broaden avenues for participation and improve public governance in general. Acting as a space for the participatory assessment and transformation of reality, the strategy adopted in such Plans could serve as a reference and inspiration for managers of cities that are part of Urbinat, and contribute to the formulation, implementation and evaluation of Nature Based Solutions.

The Action Plans are planned to last three years and will be developed by a collegiate body made up of eight members of the public authorities - from various areas - and eight members of civil society - from various sectors of society such as academia, social movements and collectives - which make up the Multi-Stakeholder Forum. The Plans are structured in three major stages, the first called co-creation, in which this multiple group establishes relevant thematic axes to work on and, based on them, defines commitments between the government and society; once these commitments are established, they will be, in a second stage, co-implementation and finally, in the third stage, co-evaluation by this collegiate.

At each Plan, the public authority and civil society actors involved are altered, as well as the thematic axes and commitments, not following a rigid methodology, but guidelines that may be customized in specific solutions for the different contexts and according to the composition of the Forum, allowing a huge thematic scope, a myriad of experiences and an adaptability to the dynamism of the contemporary world.

The project is currently in its 3rd Action Plan, in the co-implementation stage, in which the Forum's Working Groups meet monthly to forward strategies and report progress regarding the pre-established commitments. In the co-creation stage alone, we had 8 moments of elaboration, including a mapping of priority themes for civil society, public consultations, workshops with specialists in the thematic axes - to think strategies for the topics considered priority - and the joint drawing up of the Commitments.

Seeking to collaborate with the expansion of the international construction of more transparent, inclusive and plural cities and a participatory civil society in urban regeneration, we believe in the possibility of dialogue and the transferability of strategies and methods used in the Open Government Action Plans to projects developed in other locations.